Eugene Taurman wrote:
> This whole discussion reminds me of way Americans keep renaming jobs. We
> used to call them garbage men now they are sanitary engineers. We sued to
> all them employees now they are associates.
Gene, when I asked the question I didn't assume something so superficial
as renaming a job. But I do know that mindsets are changed all the time
by using words. As an example, it certainly makes it easier to exploit
people who we use object words to label (you know--cops are called pigs;
active children are labeled with attention defecit hypertensive disorder;
people who are disposessed become The Homeless). These labels count, and
we can all chat socially or professionally about other people by using
these labels.
When managers get together to talk about their employees, they (we) speak
about them in terms of their being resources. When people who you or I
might classify as resources speak about their managers, bosses, etc., they
use an entirely different lexicon of labels. Most line-staff who I've met
(labor, professional staff, collars with white or blue in them) don't
usually consider themselves in terms of resources--but many people do know
that they are considered as expenses (liabilities) as often as they are
considered resources (assets).
> it is not what we call them that counts but what is in the mind set of the
> people. It seems to me those most intent on changing the name of something
> are the least understanding of the mind set change it is supposed it
> represent.
>
> It makes no difference if we call people resources but all the difference
> in what the manager's mind set is about people. Change the name won't
> impact the mind set.
>
> People are a resource. If I have a project and I do not have the right
> kind of people (resources) it will not get done. If I have a project with
> the right resources (people) and treat them as disposable or other wise
> refuse to show care it may not get done.
I believe that you do use people as a resource--I certainly have done so.
I also am quite certain that you and I will continue to use people as
resources. Management is certainly a tool that facilitates using people.
I'm just suggesting that perhaps there is a different way to operate than
by using people to accomplish my goal. For instance, perhaps I can find
people who are interested in making my goal their goal--and we can agree
to assume different roles and functions to serve each other to accomplish
that goal. Then you might use different words than the ones you used
above--"if I have a project . . . " might become "when we have a project."
That's a big change, I know.
I certainly appreciate your offering your ideas on this thread, despite
your annoyance, Gene. Your wisdom, realism and experience validate the
question when you challenge the question so well.
regards,
Doc
--Richard C. "Doc" Holloway Your partner for workforce development Visit me at http://www.thresholds.com/community/learnshops/index.html Or e-mail me at <mailto:learnshops@thresholds.com> Mailing Address: P.O. Box 2361 Phone: 01 360 786 0925 Olympia, WA 98507 USA Fax: 01 360 709 4361
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>